1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a software evaluation method and a software evaluation system, and more particularly relates to software evaluation in a system including image forming devices, such as printers or multi function peripherals having a printer function, connected via a network.
2. Description of the Related Art
According to a conventional system, a personal computer or a similar image forming device can transmit various settings or requests to plural image forming devices connected via a network. For example, as discussed in Japanese Patent Application Laid-open No. 2000-132362, font data can be commonly registered to plural image forming devices. As a similar technique, one digital multi function peripheral can distribute an address book to other digital multi function peripherals.
One practical example of the system including plural image forming devices connected via a network is a system including plural printers or multi function peripherals having a scanner function, a facsimile function, and a copy function connected via a LAN. This system can realize a centralized control with respect to the settings for numerous image forming devices connected to a LAN.
For example, one personal computer (hereinafter, simply referred to as “PC”), one printer, or one multi function peripheral can be used as a management controller controlling other numerous image forming devices. When a user inputs predetermined settings on the management controller, the settings can be automatically distributed to other image forming devices connected via the LAN.
In another example, common settings, such as “when two consecutive originals have blank backs, copy them as one sheet printed at both front and back sides”, may be required in an office. In this case, a user can instruct the settings on one PC or one multi function peripheral, while the system automatically distributes the instructed settings to other multi function peripherals. In other words, the user need not manually operate all of the multi function peripherals to accomplish the common settings for the copy function.
Furthermore, the charge management using a department ID may be employed to administrate the number of printed sheets. In this case, a user can input a department ID on one printer or one multi function peripheral, while the system automatically distributes the department ID to other multi function peripherals. In other words, the user need not manually operate all of the multi function peripherals to accomplish the settings required for the charge management.
In the development of communication software required in the above-described useful system, an evaluation test is often carried out to confirm and assure various functions of the software. In particular, a reliable evaluation test is required for a system including numerous printers or multi function peripherals because communication errors tend to arise in such a large-scale system. The communication software evaluation, for example, includes sequential tests such as, operational confirmation and debugging, for a “distribution function” set by the software of a transmitter and a “reception function” set by the software of a receiver. One of conventional evaluation methods uses real printers or real multi function peripherals, or uses hardware devices dedicated as simulators of these devices.
However, the evaluation method requiring real printers increases the cost. In particular, the evaluation for a large scale network environment requires a large number of real printers. For example, to evaluate the communication function of “distributing the information to 20 printers each receiving the information”, the same number (i.e., 20) of real printers are required for the operational confirmation and debugging. This means that a system manufacturer must prepare 20 real printers and accordingly the entire manufacturing cost will increase. The burden and cost of the manufacturer increase as the number of printers connected to a network increases.
On the other hand, there is an evaluation method preparing a limited number of test printers smaller in total number than objects to be tested, e.g., using several or several tens printers or multi function peripherals, and evaluating the functions based on quantitative data obtained in this network environment. More specifically, theoretical values can be calculated based on a predetermined formula based on the quantitative data and the evaluation can be made based on the theoretical values.
However, the above-described evaluation method is effective only when the prepared network environment and the used formula are proper. For example, this evaluation method cannot be used in a system whose customers can actually operate the devices via a network, instead of using the theoretical values. Furthermore, when the total number of printers connected to a network increases up to a higher level (e.g., several hundreds or several thousands of printers or multi function peripherals are used), the number of real printers calculating the theoretical values must be increased to assure properness of the theoretical values. In this manner, the method using theoretical values may also encounter with the problem occurring when the number of actually operating printers increases.
Moreover, in Japanese Patent Application Laid-open No. 2003-46569, a method is provided for testing whether the software (for example, internet server software) can endure concentrated accesses from plural client PCs. More specifically, instead of using plural real client PCs, the test method uses only one PC that can virtually create plural client PCs to simulate concentrated accesses from the virtual client PCs to the server software. However, according to the method disclosed in Japanese Patent Application Laid-open No. 2003-46569, although plural virtual clients can operate on one PC, address setting for an access via a network is performed by another test module. More specifically, individual virtual clients have no independent communication functions as independent devices.
In some cases, printers or multi function peripherals can be plural receivers in a test evaluating the communication function, as described previously, wherein the communication result is evaluated for each of these devices. In this case, the arrangement using one PC for operating plural virtual software (for example, as suggested in Japanese Patent Application Laid-open No. 2003-46569) cannot be used. In other words, to execute the evaluation in the conditions identical with the real receiving devices, the virtual software itself must have the capability of recognizing and accepting an address or transmission from a client.